internet "privacy by design"

it has become self evident to me that the internet is under attack,
when copy-write barons can draw up private legislation that allows them to invade your privacy under the pretense of spying on you just IN-CASE you download one of their copy-written products, and their lobbyist can pay legislators to pass this "spy on all to catch one" law.
this means our privacy is subject to someone else who wants to monitor all communications, just in-case we wrong them.

the technology that the interent was designed on is twenty or so years old, the technology has developed itself over that time, but the hardware backbone has changed very little over that time.

the same protocols (although updated) still use the same basic design that was implemented at the inception of the net.
these protocals allowed for packet data to be routed by many different paths to the end point.

this ment that if packets couldnt get through on one route another "route" was found and packets were delivered.
some would arrive at a quicker time than others and a system was devised to allow "out of order packets"
to fit back together and become usable again, but this required a "window" of time that the packets had to be collected within.

that was the design so that unreliable and relativity new technology could be implemented with a built in "fault tolerance" that allowed for many different "routes" to be used in case of outages.

when error correcting technology got better, and allowed for much more precise control and quality of information exchange, this window "should" have gotten "smaller" (time window for packet collection)

when the hardware routers and back bone switches become MUCH more reliable and the "ping" or time between sender and receiver is much more acurite that "time window" should have been adjusted to the new environment.

by recording the time to and time from a source to a target computer and encrypting the "travel time" from one to another the "time window" could be made to be a time stamped "locked door"

why is the basic internet protocol not using a more precise method for packet data transmittion?

this leads on to the next question,
what was the "fault tolerance" of the net currently?

this lead the idea that we have not been using the net to its fullest potential, because it was built with fault tolerance in mind, and in the recent times our technology has become much more reliable so why are we using the "time window" method instead of the "time stamp" method?

after reading about the intent of the designers for "fault tolerance",
i decided to look at what our new level of processor power and the cheep availability of vast sums of ram would inspire if presented to the original designers of the net.

the story goes that DARPA used the intranet to maintain communications in times of disaster or war.

this means that ALL of the intranet was secure or ALL communications OVER the intranet was secure,
what would be the easiest way of insuring secure information?

as simple as it is cost effective, an ISP with encrypt to isp then encrypt to target, with a "time stamp" instead of "time window" to insure packets were not intercepted and or modified by a thrid party.

the internet by its genesis was designed to be secure,
by its design function was designed to be secure,

so why is the internets "ports open to the world" design still in use?

some say the internet was paid for on "the advertising model"
and without advertising "there would be no internet"

but this IMHO is an excuse to continue to INVADE the privacy of net users for the profit of advertisers and over time the courts have made decisions that state we as users EXPECT NO PRIVACY???????

this has lead into the copy-write barons passing legislation that spies on us in-case we infringe their copy-write protection, because WE DON'T EXPECT PRIVACY

i could not open your letters in the mail IN-CASE you wrong me so why should it happen on the net?

the answer is that our technology for privacy has not keep up with our expectations for privacy on the net.

advertisers and trackers follow you around the net looking for violations on copy-write so you can be prosecuted,
you are "suspected guilty" BECAUSE you have no privacy on the net.

the answer is simple, markets follow expectations, and demand drives services,
so anyone who want PRIVACY from being watched on behalf of copy-write holders and advertising trackers for the purpose of selling your information to third parties, or if you just think that you are innocent UNTILL proven guilty should take notice,

if you demand privacy
we need as consumers to SHOW the Interent Service Providers (isp) we EXPECT the privacy to not be labelled as POTENTIAL copywrite Infrindgers by supporting the new PRIVACY ISP that has adressed the issues outlined in this post.

i suggest the CALYX INSTITUTE ISP that will be launched at the end of the year,
and switch to a service based on the idea that PRIVACY by design is required to drive the expectations we have to be private and secure.

using a novel secure by design "encrypt to isp" design the new ISP will give us what we already expect yet don't actually get from our current ISPs

ACTUAL PRIVACY
this has to be driven by demand for privacy by the consumers,
and will cause other ISPs to adapt to the demand form the public for privacy or fade into obscurity

vote with your wallets or forever be spyed on by the barons?

your call,
do you expect privacy?
or do you acept that you are potentially guilty and require no privacy?

or should you be free from unlawful search and seizure?

calyx institute secure ISP

what you do with your rights to privacy may effect the internet for generations to come.

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


100% Correct. HAL

now essay on "Windows Certificates" ,
,good ?
or faulty,,backdoor?

Originally posted by BobAthome
reply to post by XPLodER

 

100% Correct. HAL

now essay on "Windows Certificates" ,
,good ?
or faulty,,backdoor?

As we already know, Flame has gained traction by tapping into security certificates for Microsoft's Terminal Server. Though they appear to be digitally signed by Microsoft, the certificates are actually cooked up by the people behind Flame, thereby tricking PCs into accepting them as legitimate.

cnet

the certs problem still requires a "man in the middle attack" and used windows update to deliver the boot loader for the flame virus example,

while i could explain how to set up a more secure certificate authentication server i wont post details for obvious reasons.

my take is that the certs themselves are okish
but the deliverey mechinism is faulty

microsoft will fix the faulty delivery mechanism and authentication process but without a "time to window" protocal a man in the middle is always going to cause issiues to authentication servers



even if encrypt to autheticate server platform was inacted


xploder

You might like my threads on this topic, XPLoDER.

We Must Replace YouTube

The Internet as a case study of Socialism


To anyone surprised about Google's privacy policy changes

reply to post by petrus4


thanks bud
ill take a look
star
xp